In my attempts to clarify my personal philosophy & how it might serve
as a base for developing my personal language use I explored both increased
ambiguity & attempts at accurate analysis. Both were (& still are)
useful. I had already developed a way of writing that began with an open
quotation mark (") followed by the Latin abbreviation for "for
example" (eg) followed by the main body of the text ended by a question
mark (?) followed by a closed quotation mark ("). The idea was to indicate
that language is intrinsically a quote in the sense that the language used
is not personal to the user, that the main body of the text is just an example
of a possibility & not definitive, & that the main body of the text
is more of a question than it is an answer. For a text that introduces this
approach read this: 1976. language . Here,
I try to analyze as directly as I can what I'm trying to do. Note that the
typewriter paper gradually torqued as the paper went through it - causing
the text to slant downward toward the right. This is not intentional on
my part & shouldn't be ascribed any meaning other than what I just explained.